New tax law already faces challenge in court

The Supreme Court is crammed jam with the volume of cases, but today there is a new case that is challenging a piece of legislation that has just become law. It is the Supreme Court of Judicature Amendment Act, which became law just a few days ago by virtue of its publication in the Gazette following an expeditious process through the House, Senate and Office of the Governor General. In this novel case, businesswoman, Wendy Castillo is challenging the new legislation, which departs from a business tax law to a law that also encompasses the General Sales Tax Act, the Land Tax Act, the Stamp duties Act, Property Tax and any other regulation imposing a tax. Attorney Lisa Shoman explains the merits of this case.

Oneyda Flores
“Ms. Shoman what is the challenge to the law about?”

Lisa Shoman, Attorney for Wendy Castillo
“Okay, we’ve filed a new case in the Supreme Court; it was filed over a week ago. The claimant in the case is Wendy Castillo, a well known businesswoman, and the challenge to the new supreme court of judicature amendment act would be that the new section which has been inserted into the act would go very far in requiring any person who is challenging the order of an inferior court about rates charges taxes or duties assessed to first pay in the amount which being challenged before the person is allowed to appeal to the court of appeal to be able to either vary the amount or to be able to challenge what is being levied.”

“The challenge that we’re taking is a challenge to the law itself to the amendment itself as being unconstitutional with regards to the constitution of Belize. In other words it offends against the constitution and shouldn’t be allowed to stand.”

Oneyda Flores
“In what way does it offend the constitution?”

Lisa Shoman
“Okay, section six of the constitution says that all persons are equal before the law and are entitled without discrimination to equal protection of the law. One of the grounds that we are arguing would say that this new amendment inserts an element of unfairness because if you are a person who cannot afford to take the cash out of your pocket and pay it into the court before making the appeal, you are then automatically shut out of an appeal. It is quite possible in the struggle to front the cash you end up not having that cash to be able to run your business or pay your bills and then simply saying that they are going to give you whatever rate of interest you should have if you are right will not replace the lost opportunities, will not replace the damage to your business, will not heal the damage that has already been done to your business.”

Oneyda Flores
“Didn’t the prime minister say that it applies mainly to the whole Telemedia situation?”

Lisa Shoman
“When the bill was introduced to the House—and it was one of these bills that was introduced and read … the three reading of this bill was done in one sitting of the House and the same in the Senate. When it was introduced in the House the prime minister made a statement saying that the reasoning behind presenting this type of amendment was really to do, and I think his words were, primarily with Telemedia; but anybody looking at this section will quickly recognize, as my client did, that this thing goes so much further than the income and business tax, which was the entire issue having to do with Telemedia and other companies like it. This will now affect other taxes which are levied.”

Attorney Anthony Sylvestre is joining Shoman in this case which is expected to come up in Court shortly.